Syria stance unlikely to hurt Lindsey Graham in 2014

Conservative foes of Sen. Lindsey Graham found fresh fodder this week, seizing on news of a meeting the South Carolina Republican had with President Barack Obama and arguing that Graham’s openness to the president’s push for action in Syria was further evidence of his overly conciliatory approach to the other side.

But that line of argument doesn’t look to amount to much in Graham’s reelection battle next year, when he’s expected to face a primary challenge from the right.

Text Size

-

+

reset

Several South Carolina political observers said in interviews that Graham would probably emerge unscathed if he supports Obama in striking Syria, despite the president’s unpopularity in the state and distrust of his proposal.

“Sen. Graham has really been a leader on a lot of foreign policy issues in the past,” said Luke Byars, a GOP political consultant in South Carolina whose firm may work on Graham’s race next year. “If he says, ‘Listen, I’ve seen the information, I’m telling you you gotta do this for these reasons,’ I think a lot of voters in South Carolina are going to take him on his word.”

Still, it didn’t take long for the accusatory tweets and statements to roll out after Graham’s visit to the Oval Office with Sen. John McCain on Monday to discuss Syria. Coming on the heels of Graham’s support for comprehensive immigration reform, the senator’s critics on the right said it’s another sign he’s not a true conservative.

“Senator Graham continues to support President Obama’s failed foreign policy,” charged Nancy Mace, a graduate of South Carolina’s famed military college, the Citadel, in a statement. Mace, currently considered Graham’s most serious GOP opponent, noted that she saw “no compelling national security interest” in Syria, and added, “I will stand with the people of South Carolina against Obama’s failed leadership and against military action in Syria.”

Graham has been a longtime proponent of American intervention in the war-torn country. Even as he has blasted Obama’s handling of the conflict, Graham has indicated that he would support strikes if the attack is more than “a check-the-box” exercise.

That’s a position that contrasts sharply with the views of GOP opponents at home, and some Republicans in Washington.

Mace’s campaign didn’t respond when asked whether she would have skipped a meeting with the president given the opportunity, a question Graham’s supporters have pushed.

“I think the picture of Lindsey Graham and John McCain sitting in the Oval Office with Barack Obama will end up in a TV ad … [some South Carolinians] don’t understand the issue, but they know they’re against Barack Obama,” said Wesley Donehue, a Republican South Carolina strategist who is not involved in the race. He added, “I don’t see any of them having a message on Syria other than, ‘The president of the United States wants to do this, so I’m going to do that.’”

But Graham could emerge as the adult in the room, Donehue continued.

“I think he’s going to come across as a guy who wants to solve problems, rather than a person who wants to stir up crap,” he said.

State Sen. Lee Bright and businessman Richard Cash, other primary contenders, have also expressed varying levels of opposition to action in Syria.And Graham has drawn ire online from South Carolina conservative activists, who focused on the optics of appearing with Obama.

“All these naysayers don’t understand, you can’t influence policy if you don’t have a seat at the table,” fired back Warren Tompkins, a veteran Palmetto State Republican consultant who has advised Graham in the past. “Refusing to meet with the president, how can you possibly get your point known? That’s the difference between people who want to [get] press versus someone who’s seriously trying to do what’s right, exploring the facts, doing the due diligence, making informed decisions.”

Tompkins said Graham would be well-positioned to make the case for Syria if it is deemed to be in the country’s best interests, though he noted that people are “war-weary” — even in a state with significant military and veterans populations.

“South Carolina Republicans are traditionally supportive of a strong national defense,” South Carolina GOP Chairman Matt Moore told POLITICO. “I think you’d be hard-pressed to find a state more supportive of a strong national defense... Where we are now, South Carolina Republicans are waiting to see if Syria is truly in our best national defenses. That includes Sen. Graham’s statements: he’s not convinced yet.”

Graham has been careful to distance himself from Obama, calling on the president to “up his game” and charging that Syria is “the most mismanaged situation I’ve ever seen since World War II when they were trying to to control the Nazis.”

“As he said yesterday, the choices that were good and very good, those are in the rear-view window,” said Graham spokesman Kevin Bishop. “We should have acted previously, we should have acted years ago. Our options today are bad and worse. He’s talking to the people of South Carolina, explaining to them, frankly there are upsides and downsides to taking action, and upsides and downsides to not taking action.”

Richard Quinn, a GOP strategist who has consulted for Graham, said the senator has cultivated a reputation as a leader on foreign policy issues. He was an outspoken critic of the administration’s handling of the attacks last September on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, and an especially vocal proponent of impeding Iran’s nuclear program.

If Graham votes to green-light military action against Syria, Quinn added, he may have the power to bring South Carolinians with him.

“He’s highly respected in South Carolina and nationally has earned an awful lot of respect over the years, especially on issues of foreign policy,” he said. “I think voters in South Carolina will pay a lot of attention to what he says.”